Amazon.com Widgets
  • The U.S. Is spoiled in comparison to other countries

    Teachers Unions prevent the firing of nearly any teacher that has worked long enough for the school. I lost several years of learning due to a less than helpful french teacher that constantly wend off topic and gave biased grading. But the Teachers Union continued to support her, and it took around 15 years for her to finally leave.

  • The too damn greedy. All they care about is ripping American wallets.

    I live in the San Francisco Bay Area and BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) has been our top story over a month and early last month they went on strike for 4 days. BART is a train service that serves the SF Bay Area and carry about 400,000 people per day. Unions were going to strike again this week but the Governor adverted the strike for least week. While most of us commuters can breathe easily, we still have to wonder what will happen next week. Unions want a 21% pay increase cheaper health insurance, and they only pay $ 95 dollars for health insurance. Most of us are paying over 150 a month. BART said they would give them a 7% pay increase sound fair, but they turned it down because they want more.

    The job is easy to do and only requires a high school diploma to apply. The trains are automated and driver only announce stops and open doors, and they getting paid around $ 60,000 a year to do this and want more. I know people who has high school diploma doing security only make $ 31,000 a year.

    If they do get that raise the fares are going to skyrocket, we cannot afford anymore fare increase. Children will need their lunch money to get to school and that is bad. All unions need to be removed, and fire them all and replace non-union workers.

  • Unions are a punishment tax for workers

    Unions had their place and then they went political. Should they be banned? I'll say yes if they remain as they are right now. They are nothing but a Democrat Party source of campaign funding. They made some unreasonable moves which helped drive out companies. They support a political party that prefers to "bring jobs in the front door, sell "look what I did for you" buttons, and escort them out the back door by hitting them with unreasonable regulations. Unions need to stand up to companies and to politicians. If it wasn't so damn one sided and owned by Democrats, their political power would have clout if they could get both sides to compete.

  • Labor unions no longer serve a purpose

    When labor laws did not exist and poor workers were being mistreated by employers, these unions were a strong unifying force for the downtrodden fighting the corporations. However, as time passed, laws protected those workers and ethical standards were introduced. Now these unions try to get their workers as much security and money from their employers for the least amount of work, causing businesses to avoid unionized states like the plague.

  • Unions have a confusing and contradicting message.

    When they first started the point of unions was to set limits on work hours, get young children out of work, to stop striking, and to help the employer know who was working and who wasn’t. Now the unions are there to help the strikers and fight the employer. The whole point of the unions was to fight the employers. That is why we made laws like the Taft Hartley Act. This act puts restrictions on unions and protects the basic rights of employees. One of the restrictions includes, “Employees had the right to refrain from participating in union or mutual aid activities except that they could be required by their employer to join in with the union.” (Pre Wagner) this was put in place to restrict union activities but now the unions have gotten larger. As the old saying goes, “Give them an inch and they will take a mile.” That is exactly what the unions have done. We, the people, have let the unions do. What do I mean by that, you may be wondering? I mean that we let the unions get away with not abiding by these laws and now they have taken that one time and ran with it.

  • Get a job

    Corporate powers? Very simple my simple minded friend. Corporations can pay what will yield a margin on their sales. If they can't, they fail. Can you do a spreadsheet? Very simple.
    If workers are willing to work at the wages that will provide a simple margin, they will be employed. If they won't, with or without unions, they won't.
    If unions post wages that are above what is above that employers can pay and post a margin and overall profit, those businesses will fail and the workers will not be hired.
    Pretty simple really if you can understand maths up to 2+2.
    So, how precisely do unions help those who cannot be hired at the wages that will allow the business to succeed and hire them?
    Oh forgive me, I'm just a simple minded PhD in economics.

  • Get a job

    Corporate powers? Very simple my simple minded friend. Corporations can pay what will yield a margin on their sales. If they can't, they fail. Can you do a spreadsheet? Very simple.
    If workers are willing to work at the wages that will provide a simple margin, they will be employed. If they won't, with or without unions, they won't.
    If unions post wages that are above what is above that employers can pay and post a margin and overall profit, those businesses will fail and the workers will not be hired.
    Pretty simple really if you can understand maths up to 2+2.
    So, how precisely do unions help those who cannot be hired at the wages that will allow the business to succeed and hire them?
    Oh forgive me, I'm just a simple minded PhD in economics.

  • Constraint of Trade: Clayton Sherman Act

    Any constraint of trade is a violation of the Clayton-Sherman Act, unless of course, that constraint is a union of self interested Marxist dirtbags who cannot support themselves otherwise, i.E., all members of the Democratic, Socialist, Nazi and other associated Parties.
    Why don't you Jew haters get real jobs and observe the law as all corporations must?
    Can't work the day, don't deserve the pay. Get jobs and pay taxes you Nazi-communist union thugs.

  • They destroy the employer employee relationship

    The idea of trade unions is a noble one, and they have served their purpose of improving the rights for employees very well in the past. However, these fundamental rights are now law. The only purpose the unions serve now is to cripple public services and destroy the trust between workers and their bosses. They should be a mediator between workers and bosses, not a provocateur.

  • Unions are too entitled to everything, and too greedy.

    Why the hell should I pay membership for, too expensive. It literally takes away our rights to work if we lose membership. We should have freedom to work without any cruel punishment for not paying the membership. I am against unions, because they have way too much power to cripple us from keeping a job.

  • Unions are essential for a strong and healthy economy!!!

    I'm surprised by all of the ultra-moronic arguments against unions on here. Seems like some corporate/conservative shills have been paid lots of money to propagate the LIE AND MYTH of unions being evil.

    LISTEN, COORPORATIONS AND BUSINESSES ARE PURE TYRANNY. Every business is a microcosm of a fascist dictatorship. You report to a boss who can do almost anything he/she likes with you. If you dare go against your boss and defy what they say, you can get fired. If you don't work hard or fast enough, you can get fired. If you complain about the pay or time off, you can get fired. Unions, as supported by the government(s), are THE ONLY bargaining chip that the working poor and middle class have to improve their lot as employees. Without unions, children would STILL be working in factories and you could be fired if you were in a job that put you in harms way and were injured. Make no mistake about it, a unionless country is the rich's, the business owner's, and corporate america's wet dream.

    Starting with Reagan, we've seen a smear campaign against unions. Why? Well, the rich and the business elite were tired of those pesky poor and middle class workers asking for a fair wage, a little more time off, and a little better health benefits and saught to take away any gains made by the poor and middle class in these areas. This smear campaign against the poor and middle class workers has been so successful at portraying unions as evil, that even the workers who have benefitted enormously from unions have been persuaded to vote against their own interest and do their master's (bosses/business owners) bidding.

    The reason income inequality has been so rampant these past few years is a direct result from unions being systematically destroyed through conservative lies and corporate propaganda. At least people are finally waking up and realizing that UNIONS ARE THE BIGGEST ASSET/BARGAINING CHIP THE WORKING POOR AND MIDDLE CLASS HAVE against corporate America's/capitalism's exploitation of them.

  • Get a job

    Corporate powers? Very simple my simple minded friend. Corporations can pay what will yield a margin on their sales. If they can't, they fail. Can you do a spreadsheet? Very simple.
    If workers are willing to work at the wages that will provide a simple margin, they will be employed. If they won't, with or without unions, they won't.
    If unions post wages that are above what is above that employers can pay and post a margin and overall profit, those businesses will fail and the workers will not be hired.
    Pretty simple really if you can understand maths up to 2+2.
    So, how precisely do unions help those who cannot be hired at the wages that will allow the business to succeed and hire them?
    Oh forgive me, I'm just a simple minded PhD in economics.

  • They will always be necessary.

    As consumers we always try to screw companies out of money. Most people choose to shop at places like KMart over smaller business even though we know they can't compete for prices. People will do anything to save a buck, even if they don't really need it. Why would ever expect an employer behave differently. In Australia our government tried to eliminate collective bargaining in order to make the unions irrelevant and employers happily took the opportunity to slash workers pay.

  • CAN unions be banned?

    I personally think that most unions are terrible for the economy and the government should take efforts to reduce union influence on public policy. That said, the government cannot ban protests and strikes, so a ban on unions would be virtually ineffective since the people who used to be unionized can still apply political pressure on their employers and the government.

  • Unions Need To Strengthen

    Unions have done a lot to help this country and it's people, while they have caused problems in the past I do not believe they should be banned and certainly not at this juncture in time. America has a large predator that would love to see unions go and that predator is Wal-Mart.

  • Banning unions cripples freedom of association

    It is true that some unions have corrupt "bosses", but they should be regulated instead of being banned. The Constitution protects freedom of assembly, which includes unions, so banning unions would be unconstitutional. Also, unions are responsible for regulations such as 40 hour work week, abolition of child labor etc.

  • Unions are a democratising force

    Since the Tolpuddle martyrs in the early nineteenth century, trade unions have been the only thing stopping unscrupulous capitalists from exploiting workers. Unions are a symbol of man's right to govern one's self, and if banned, it would be a serious blow to workers' rights as well as overall freedom. They are what makes the private sector accountable, and place the interests of the many above the interests of the few in the public sector. I'm sure the GOP would love to destroy unions, breaking the only control the plebeians have over their destinies, and destroy the public sector in favour of the private sector to their hearts' content. But unions are the greatest social organisations in the modern world; better than religion, better than charities, better than every other organisation that could be thought of.

  • No, but more labor regulation is a better solution.

    There are some inherent issues that arise from unions, namely it leads to people playing a system where there is no merit involved with pay. In some cases they keep inept individuals in jobs they should not be in. However they are better than nothing right now.

    Ultimately more labor regulation protecting workers rights and pay is the better and more efficient solution. It means workers wouldn't have to fight for rights over and over again while companies would still able to reward merit, and let go of employees that unable adequately perform their jobs.

  • Banning them would be a step too extreme

    While some unions definitely tend to misuse their power of collective bargaining, banning the unions altogether would be an extreme step and may prove fatal for the future of millions of ordinary workers. What is needed instead are proper laws to curb the misuse of power & influence by these unions instead of altogether banning them.

  • Banning unions will only consolidate power further into the hands of the few

    One only needs to look at working conditions prior to the establishment of unions to learn that: 7 day work weeks were commonplace and mandatory, child labor was a norm, deplorable work conditions often left workers permanently disabled or ill with no compensation, there was no minimum wage leading to wages drops every time there was a new wave of immigrant workers.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.